comedian Tracy Morgan hurt in bus/truck crash

[QUOTE="semi" retired;4065404]I figured some of you would misunderstand my post. I am NOT advocating drugs. I was merely stating how our country is spoiled on expecting our goods to be there because in the past, that's how it was done. Sure, sleep is the best, but just , sometimes not an option. Don't you think this poor guy knew he was tired, and should have taken a nap, but was probably already late. And for the record, I'm semi retired, not because I can't do drugs, it's because I've had enough of the BS of companies making unreasonable demands and the conduct of 4 wheelers, and our govt. making unjust rules. And joseph, some of your comments, I feel, are WAY out of line. The fact that you have a truck crash in your signature photo is especially disturbing to me, and others , as well, I'm sure.[/QUOTE]
Your last post wasn't in another language besides English. I got it. In fact, it speaks to a broader problem that exists in the transport industry. That is: while the consumers of our service continue to demand greater service delivery, our lawmakers and regulators continue to "solve problems" that diminish our flexibility to deliver that. People here need to look at the big picture instead of focusing on details or who’s at fault.


Your post speaks to a time when drivers had the flexibility to deliver premium service, and they set the bar high. I didn't see a blanket statement that everything drivers did back in the day was good or a best practice. You didn't say that drivers popping speed so they could drive days on end was a good way to achieve that. I don't either. But it was one of several things (in addition to no HOS, or later more flexible HOS) that drivers could use and get away with, at the time, in order to meet expectations. Those drugs weren't legal back in the day, either. It just wasn't something as easily detectible as now with mandatory random drug testing requirements. Frankly, some of those less than best practices employed back in the day were less risky at the time. Fewer vehicles on the roads, less congestion, and so on.


So what? This isn't going to change. In fact, I'd even propose that it will get worse. More government bearing down with more regulation can't fix this. In the 21st century, we have ongoing improvements in technology to squeeze a nickel until the buffalo craps. There really aren't any "partnerships" any more. Business has devolved into contractor relationships. On the surface, it's done in order to improve efficiency. Focus on your core competency and sublet out the rest. What this model really does is push risk out to contractors. Instead of a retailer like Walmart handling a transportation side business, it can make more sense to put an RFP on the street that asks for the moon and the stars and grind that performance out of the low bidder. The customer gains immediate cost control, along with reduced exposure to the risk of that operation.


There will always be operators in any industry that are perpetual line-steppers. In ours, shippers and brokers that will schedule delivery times down to the minute (and then some) and carriers that will accept them. The market drives this no matter how much control our elected officials bear down with.


Look at the "expedited" transport segment. High availability, immediate gratification, paid at a supposedly higher rate to compensate for the means to deliver that level of service. The majority of responsible carriers that serve it will come up with clever, legal ways to deliver. More trucks and drivers. Spare equipment. Team or re-power distribution. And so on. Then there's another way, that's just not sustainable due to risk and higher service failure. Play the odds and manage toward the greater profit offsetting penalties from a risky operation. That ranges from just taking your chances with a solo driver that has no logistical backup, all the way to serial violators with false logbooks, less than optimal equipment maintenance, taking speed to stay awake days on end, and so on.


As much as it burns my fingertips to type this, I think the solution exists in the court system and vicarious liability. Not higher liability insurance limits, as that is a totally different measure that only benefits trial attorneys and pushes small carriers out of business. Vicarious liability.


From wikipedia: the responsibility of the superior for the acts of their subordinate, or, in a broader sense, the responsibility of any third party that had the "right, ability or duty to control" the activities of a violator.


Take away the ability to shove liability out of your business by hiring a contractor. Then shippers and brokers offering impossible to perform service orders, along with the carriers that accept them, are equally liable for mishaps that occur as a result.


Obviously, this vicarious liability would have less bearing on the original topic here, as the incident involved one of Walmart’s own employees. But not entirely. If what I’m seeing in the news pans out in court, it could be a case where their practice of hiring drivers to base out of a DC hundreds or thousands of miles from their home and then strictly managing scheduling to HOS laid the groundwork for this event. Walmart will certainly say that their expectation is that a driver would relocate to accommodate their new work location. But did they really own that? I suppose they could, and may well have, written that requirement into the employment contract. If so, what was done to enforce it? How many other drivers do they have out there that commute home for their 34 reset and spend half that time driving in their own car to get there? Probably a lot.


At the end of the day, the victims of this tragedy will own a piece of Walmart. The driver has nothing, and won’t for some time while he serves a prison sentence then comes out as a convicted felon with one less skill he can use to make a living. I guess my point is that every step in the logistics chain owns this tragedy. Not just a driver that may have been irresponsible about managing his personal schedule to meet the demands of a remote job opportunity. The government can’t fix this with more regulation, restrictions, and technology. The set up has to be too risky in the first place for all the participants in this transaction, end to end, to even attempt it.

 

Can't talk seriously about safety as long as cell phones operate in moving cars or motorcyclist can ride without helmets. Most truckers average 60 to 70 hour work weeks legally which is more than the body is meant to tolerate especially operating 40 ton missiles.

 

The standards here have not changed and we are no more micro managed then any other company. Still one of the best jobs out there with excellent pay.some of you crack me up I will just keep smiling all the way to bank. The haters are going to hate that will never change.

 

Check this out its on TMZ

http://m.tmz.com/#Article/2014/06/10/tracy-morgan-accident-kevin-roper-twitter-crash

 

"The first thing we must recognize is that crashes are not accidents." -Ricardo Martinez, M.D., NHTSA Administrator, 1997

 

a lot of truth what Walmart said about the media.

 

What "book" did you get this from? Who has decided "what the body can tolerate". A person works 45 hours a week at a "regular job" and spends 10 hours week in traffic too/from work ... most average WORKING American's are at or near 60 hours week already spent in the act of making a living.

Just don't forget, we are not anywhere near home every day so every hour less spent driving is one more hour staring out at a trashy truck stop vista trying to keep boredom and being sedentary from running us down, further.

 

I don't think so. The Pilot In Command is always responsible for all operational decisions within their control*. There is no limit to the human ability to transfer responsibility to other parties.

*This is not meant to suggest or imply responsibility for an incorrect runway clearance to take off or land falls upon the PIC, unless an incursion is detectable from their vantage.

 

does anyone know of an actual number of fatalities caused by commercial vehicles vs. non per year on interstate highways? Does that even get reported?

 

http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/sites/fmcs...ommercial_Motor_Vechicle_Facts_March_2013.pdf

Found here

http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/safety/data-and-statistics/commercial-motor-vehicle-facts

might help if you've got the time to do the analysis work

To me, one interesting thing to note is, property damage only crashes are going down while fatality crashes are going up